User talk:Sefre
/archive1 Update I have been updating the depreciated format of the builds too. I'm just saying because it was a coincidence (or however you spell it lol)--Banditda 18:58, 28 May 2007 (CEST) :I've actually stopped for now, mostly because I don't have a lot of computer time now that its the end of the school year and also because most of those are unfavored and we need to wait until PW:WELL and PvXWiki:Real Vetting are settled in relation to unfavored builds so we know their fates. :And get fire fox, you miss spell a word and it does the little red lines underneath like in word processors and gives you spelling suggestion when you right click the word. -- 19:28, 28 May 2007 (CEST) ::Sefre, most of the unfavored builds fall under PvX:DELETE anyway. Just so you know. -- Armond Warblade 01:49, 29 May 2007 (CEST) :::I do have firefox but i never used it so now i know--Banditda 06:31, 30 May 2007 (CEST) RA hi pwnt! — Skuld 22:17, 28 May 2007 (CEST) :Ok....?-- 22:51, 28 May 2007 (CEST) ::I killed you in RA. That is all. — Skuld 23:52, 28 May 2007 (CEST) :::rofl, Skuld? Shoo :p. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 04:03, 29 May 2007 (CEST) Readem If you would prefer to bring this arguement onto MSN, you may reach me at: imviciousdelicious@hotmail.com Thank-you for your cooperation. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 06:00, 3 June 2007 (CEST) :No, I hate IMs, don't have one and never intend to. If you wish to end this conflict you may stop "undermining" me.-- 06:06, 3 June 2007 (CEST) Notice I will be discussing this with all of the users involved in the bickering, but, I am going to post here first. The discussion that began on the Administrators talk page has now spilled over onto 4 pages, and it is time that we stopped bickering and started actual discussion. To that effect, I would ask that you limit the scope of your comments to the PvX:Administrator talk page because spreading it out merely leads to greater exacerbation of the issue. Similarly, please make this a civil debate. If you have a point you would like to make, please limit the scope of your comments to a discussion of the pros and cons of a particular issue rather than being sidetracked by petty bickering, particularly between yourself and Readem, and please focus on the issue. I have very carefully reviewed all of the evidence on all 4 pages, but, I have found no evidence of NPA violations by any party. As such, no one will be banned, or even warned by me for conduct, however, I strongly urge you to stick to the issue at hand before we have greater escalation. Furthermore, I beleive that this debate, in its current form on the Wiki is posing an increasingly large disturbance to PvX. As such, if it is at all possible, would you be able to create an MSN account so we can settle this issue in a calm fashion in a forum consisting of all interested wiki members as opposed to this pointless arguing? And, if at all possible, I would ask people to refrain from posting in any forum for at least a few days in order to prevent escalation. However, as I understand that you would like your opinion heard, if you really feel the need to continue posting, I will repeat what I said earlier, try to contain yourself to one forum and try to limit yourself to the actual debate, doing so in a calm fashion. Thank you. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 23:46, 3 June 2007 (CEST) :Ok.... This announcement is about half a day late, discussion has mostly ceased already....-- 00:08, 4 June 2007 (CEST) ::Doesn't matter. Be civil, or be gone. (Yes, I'm late. I'm an admin with a lot on his watchlist, and I've not been able to get online a lot lately. Deal with it.) -- Armond Warblade 18:57, 4 June 2007 (CEST) :::See how I automatically become the bad guy? When if you actually looked at the discussion on gcardinals talk page that all I was doing to trying to keep a valid discussion from being interrupted, by a admin I might add. Gotta love it. I think I'm just going to make a new account so that you guys don't all automatically assume I'm trying to tear the wiki down or something whenever I post.-- 21:42, 4 June 2007 (CEST) ::::I know it was late, I posted it just to make sure, it can't really hurt, can it? And, as to you becoming the bad guy, the same notice was posted on Readem's page as well as on the Administrator talk page, so I believe that that constitutes evenhandedness. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 05:49, 5 June 2007 (CEST) :::::Taking into account actions of others,not you, that impression is pretty obvious.-- 05:55, 5 June 2007 (CEST) Warning. Regarding this edit... Stop being a dick. It's fine when you're blunt, but you pass the line of "blunt" every time you post. You went to Armond, who responded without bias (pointing out both your flaws and Readem's). He continues to be blunt, but respectful. Your reply has no respect at all. This is why I feel it necessary to warn you here. You are a disturbance to this wiki. You aren't helping with anything. I wouldn't mind so much if your acting like a dick achieved something or got work done, but alas, it does not. You are being a dick for no reason. So... stop. You can be as blunt as you want, but the next time I see you mouthing off (read - no respect), I will ban you. -Auron 05:48, 6 June 2007 (CEST) :Well auron, you just can't help but get involved to smear my name? :I have a couple points here tho, :Your idea of unbiased is someone that thinks like you..... :What you consider disrupting the wiki is actually uncovering problems that people don't want to face. That and standing my ground on it. :and FYI, calling someone a dick is a clear violation of NPA, if you deny this there is no way you can accuse me of so.-- 06:30, 6 June 2007 (CEST) Well its official now, certain administrative staff have taken up a problem with me. There is now no way I can defend myself without being accused of violating NPA or something else. I'll make a final statement: *I have not used attacks against anyone and only replied with rudeness against those who first acted it. I had always asked for reasoning behind actions first then acted bluntly when needed. *I have recently brought up several controversial issues that many people did not like, specifically those in admin positions. This caused heated arguments that were needed for the good of the wiki. I tired to separate those issues from conflicts with users to no avail because any post I made after that was targeted. *I am willing to bring up the tough issues that need to be visited, and I did not and will not stand down when I am attacked for doing so, and I always have responded to attacks in the same matter in which they were delivered, usually rude although I tried to be mature at first. *I know very well that I am now hated by some, and I treat them how they treat me. I have not violated NPA in these responses, and if you say that I have then the opposer would be more guilty. I do not expect to convince any involved parties, bias would prevent most from understanding and hate would block the rest. However I will not let my name be shit on without due cause and not without revealing the accusers. I understand that my name is bad in some circles, and rightfully so when that is because I am willing to bring up issues no one likes, and defend myself when assaulted. But for the good of the wiki I hope some people can see reason.-- 06:30, 6 June 2007 (CEST) And one more thing, someone just freaking ban me, I'm getting sick and tired of being threatened with that, I have said what i will say now anyways. -- 06:32, 6 June 2007 (CEST) I am asking to your benefit, to please avoid any further confrontation. Thank-you for your cooperation. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 06:44, 6 June 2007 (CEST) Your arguments make little sense. If you're dead set on martyrdom, stop skirting around issues. For example... *"I have not used attacks against anyone..." **My last warning wasn't for NPA violation, it was for general asshattery (which, if bad enough, I have no problem banning for). *"I have recently brought up several controversial issues..." **I have never complained about you bringing issues up (in fact, I complimented it). I've responded to all the issues I saw in a conversational manner; I haven't chastised you or downplayed your opinion on each issue. If you want to discuss things without outside opinion(/intrusion?), feel free to message me in-game or by email. *"*I am willing to bring up the tough issues that need to be visited..." **Good. Keep doing it. But remember to respect other editors in the meantime. *"*I know very well that I am now hated by some, and I treat them how they treat me." **Well... no. I respect you, and strive to maintain that respect every time I post to you. You, however, don't return that respect. It happened to Armond as well. You asked him a question, which he answered honestly and accurately. Furthermore, he responded with respect ("I may not have the highest opinion of you right now, but I'm glad that you're willing to come talk to me about these things."). Your response is basically "stay out of my issues, unless I deem it necessary." He responds, after reading the discussion on four other pages, and comes to a conclusion about you and Readem. He even summarizes for you ("Your list is longer. His is more serious"). Your response to him is nonsensical, especially after he made even judgments of both parties involved ("It seems to like to hand pick details to put me down and not him."). If you're going to bring up controversial issues, be prepared to defend your position. Every issue you've discussed has ended in a kind of "vey iz mir" instead of consensus, largely because you start acting like so much of a dick that nobody cares to continue discussion. This is not okay. You don't win discussions by pissing people off. You win discussions by presenting your arguments in a clear, concise manner, so people can understand exactly what it is you want and respond without problems. -Auron 07:10, 6 June 2007 (CEST) :Guess what auron, you can't take the words of a biased person seriosuly. Wether you are misinformed or dont care krowman did not give a even answer on the psot you are talking about, reading the actual discussion and that is obvious. Besides the fact that you don't speak for everyone I am reffering too, this is realy none of your buisness either. You chose to act based on what I assume is hate or arrogance or something else, it doesn't matter. :You want to know how this started? I'll tell you: I brought up a discussion on admin page relating to admin promotion. After a couple replys Readem joins and I reply relating to how he became a admin. He was aparently annyoed because later when I tried to discuss with Gcardinal he decided to use childish comemnts to distract from the issue. I posted on his talk page asking him not to and after a couple volleys he admits to doing it for fun and latter because he didn't like his new job being challeneged. Then certain admins decide to enforce there will how big bad sefre is harrasing readem. And after I try to defend myself, here we are. :I had never intended to bring this to this point, but aparently thoose certain admins will choose to blindly support someone because of my history as a contreversial psoter and becase I wont be intimidated by them, and I use rudeness agasint rudeness and arrogance. So yea, I am the bad guy. Thanks-- 08:20, 6 June 2007 (CEST) ::Don't drag me into all this, just get some bloody sleep... - Krowman 08:32, 6 June 2007 (CEST) :::I'm not defending Readem or anybody else, I'm calling you out directly. I don't really care what you say to Readem or to Krowman or to Gcardinal or anybody, that isn't my problem. It becomes my problem as soon as you start disrespecting others. I've seen a few instances of others disrespecting you; I'm more wary about it now, and will warn(/ban, if it gets bad enough) every user that does so. Yes, I get frustrated as well when I bring up an issue and others "respond" to it without adding anything to the discussion; but generally, I just ignore it and go on. As soon as others see that you aren't easily goaded and that you want to get an answer to your question, they'll leave out the meaningless crap. But if they keep seeing an easily distracted person that wants to make change, they'll probably keep up the distracting; people, in general, dislike change, and will go pretty far out of their way to stop it. :::As long as your arguments are true and you're being respectful, you have my support. If you feel disrespected, leave a note on my talk page, I'll yell at people about it. I don't want you feeling like it's you against the world. -Auron 08:52, 6 June 2007 (CEST) ::::You are assuming a lot of the people you are talking to. I honestly doubt you'll listen to me, but I am suggesting - for possibly the last time - that you take a step back and think about the other people in the discussion and their comments, and then reply fairly and evenly. -- Armond Warblade 17:37, 6 June 2007 (CEST) Please check it out Help needed. Thx :)